Strong hiring in May cuts unemployment rate to 18-year low

WASHINGTON – U.S. employers extended a streak of solid hiring in May, adding 223,000 jobs and helping lower the unemployment rate to an 18-year low of 3.8 percent from 3.9 percent in April. Average hourly pay rose 2.7 percent from a year earlier, a slightly faster annual rate than in April, the Labor Department reported Friday. But pay growth remains below levels that are typical when the unemployment rate is this low. Still, the report shows that the nearly 9-year old economic expansion — the second-longest on record — remains on track. Employers appear to be shrugging off recent concerns about global trade disputes.

Source: Strong hiring in May cuts unemployment rate to 18-year low

So, we have a massive increase in hiring, a dropping unemployment rate, and hourly pay raises since the new administration came onboard.

How is this a bad thing?

I am seriously asking. Can those haters of our president even acknowledge that these figures from the U.S. Labor Dept are positive aspects of our current economy?

Cue the media trying to give Obama credit. Just watch.

"It's too late for the liberals, their hate has already brought them to the dark side"

-Sheev Palpatine

racist

/gameover

a reply to: Krakatoa

Good news!

Now, can we start focusing on a better stat category?... something like the percentage of the working age population in/out of the workforce...

(Maybe I’m wrong, but if someone is not looking for work, they don’t fall into “unemployed,” right?)

Just trying to have the best information...

originally posted by: japhrimu
a reply to: Krakatoa

Good news!

Now, can we start focusing on a better stat category?... something like the percentage of the working age population in/out of the workforce...

(Maybe I’m wrong, but if someone is not looking for work, they don’t fall into “unemployed,” right?)

Just trying to have the best information...

This article (linked in the OP) addressed that point too, it states:

Companies are also hiring the long-term unemployed — those who have been out of work for six months or longer. Their ranks have fallen by nearly one-third in the past year. That's important because economists worry that people who are out of work for long periods can see their skills erode. Yet employers now seem more willing to hire them.

So, that too is good news for those that have dropped off the official unemployment stats.

a reply to: Krakatoa

So, we have a massive increase in hiring, a dropping unemployment rate, and hourly pay raises since the new administration came onboard.

Fox News Research Verified account @FoxNewsResearch

Average Monthly #Job Gains
-by year

• 2017: 171,000
• 2016: 187,000
• 2015: 226,000
• 2014: 250,000
• 2013: 192,000
• 2012: 179,000
• 2011: 174,000
• 2010: 88,000
#JobsReport

8:54 AM - 5 Jan 2018

I am seriously asking. Can those haters of our president even acknowledge that these figures from the U.S. Labor Dept are positive aspects of our current economy?

I dunno, seemed to work out fine for all the years that Trump's base was caterwauling about how Obama was destroying the economy.

a reply to: Krakatoa

Maybe next time use a better source.
But yes some of those numbers are correct. There are a few that are snotty to say the least.
Not that I care all the much. I make more money now even though my property tax went up slightly. But the money gained well made up for it.
Ummm here are a couple other links for you and others to check out.

BLS gov

factcheck

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Krakatoa

So, we have a massive increase in hiring, a dropping unemployment rate, and hourly pay raises since the new administration came onboard.

Fox News Research Verified account url=https://twitter.com/FoxNewsResearch/status/949277919779663873]@FoxNewsResearch[/url]

Average Monthly #Job Gains
-by year

• 2017: 171,000
• 2016: 187,000
• 2015: 226,000
• 2014: 250,000
• 2013: 192,000
• 2012: 179,000
• 2011: 174,000
• 2010: 88,000
#JobsReport

8:54 AM - 5 Jan 2018

I am seriously asking. Can those haters of our president even acknowledge that these figures from the U.S. Labor Dept are positive aspects of our current economy?

I dunno, seemed to work out fine for all the years that Trump's base was caterwauling about how Obama was destroying the economy.

I guess you failed to read the article I linked, since it also talks about the type of jobs being added/hired:

For example, the number of part-time workers who would prefer full-time jobs declined slightly and is down 6 percent from a year ago. That may mean that businesses are converting some part-timers to full-time work.

The past few years since ACA went into affect, employers were shifting full-time position to part-time positions to avoid the "ACA Tax" to cover the full-time employees as a cost saving measure. It seems here that now the employers have begun the shift back to full-time workers as well, meaning those that lost health-care coverage will now get coverage back.

Again, another positive for workers needing health care too.

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: Krakatoa

Maybe next time use a better source.
But yes some of those numbers are correct. There are a few that are snotty to say the least.
Not that I care all the much. I make more money now even though my property tax went up slightly. But the money gained well made up for it.
Ummm here are a couple other links for you and others to check out.

BLS gov

factcheck

So, I guess the Associated Press (the original source) is not good enough? And the U.S. Labor Dept providing the stats is also not good enough?

Really?

You are going to go there to put a negative spin on the data.

a reply to: theantediluvian

Yeah, how did all those burger flipping part time jobs Obama created work out?

a reply to: Krakatoa

Dude I wasn’t trying to put a negative spin on it. Sorry if it seemed that way.
I was just trying to help out. The unemployment differs with each age group and ethnicity and specific job types. I just thought a couple other links might keep the wolves at bay.

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: Krakatoa

Dude I wasn’t trying to put a negative spin on it. Sorry if it seemed that way.
I was just trying to help out. The unemployment differs with each age group and ethnicity and specific job types. I just thought a couple other links might keep the wolves at bay.

Apologies if I misunderstood.

Thanks for the additional sources..

a reply to: Krakatoa

Also there's always a Tweet:

Donald J. Trump Verified account @realDonaldTrump

Today's job report is not a good sign & we could be facing another recession. No real job growth. We need over 300K new jobs a month.

3:49 PM - 7 Dec 2012

Keep in mind that this "not a good sign" report from Dec 2012 saw 7,000 more jobs than Dec 2017.

And of course, anything less than 300k a month is subpar by Trump standards. Total loser! Sad!

WAIT a darn minute !
Pelosi Statement on May Jobs Report

originally posted by: theantediluvian
I dunno, seemed to work out fine for all the years that Trump's base was caterwauling about how Obama was destroying the economy.

It did. He, too, was a 2-term POTUS.

a reply to: theantediluvian

In 2012 we needed 300K jobs per month to rebuild from the Great Recession in a timely manner. That was 6 years ago. After 4 years of painfully slow rolling "growth" and the last 2 years of fairly healthy growth, the economy has covered those gaps.

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Krakatoa

Also there's always a Tweet:

Donald J. Trump Verified account @realDonaldTrump

Today's job report is not a good sign & we could be facing another recession. No real job growth. We need over 300K new jobs a month.

3:49 PM - 7 Dec 2012

Keep in mind that this "not a good sign" report from Dec 2012 saw 7,000 more jobs than Dec 2017.

And of course, anything less than 300k a month is subpar by Trump standards. Total loser! Sad!

More part-time jobs is NOT the same as more full-time jobs. There is a bit of a difference. Taking one full-time job and splitting into two part-time jobs is not really doubling the job growth now is it? In 2012, that was the point of the dire prediction you stated. IT was a BAD strategy for the economy just to make the numbers appear positive for political reasons. This is why I also quoted the job TYPES that are part of this increase. A move away from part-time toward full-time IS a positive for the economy.

But then, as long as the number rises, who cares how the system was gamed for that purpose in 2012? Right?

It’s bad because it Trump. Just like bringing back manufacturing jobs is bad because it’s trump, just like negotiating trade deals and meeting with Kim jung Un. If this were Obama or HRC they would be hailing this the best 18 months of any president, but it’s Trump.

a reply to: Krakatoa

Yup typical end of school season hiring rush...I swear I see the same story every year around this time and every year people forget about the thousands of college and high school people getting temporary summer jobs this time of year. Always nice to be able to say the numbers are going up I suppose...Would be nice to know how many of those jobs end in September...